Thats a great idea. Did you have much luck with it or did you find that alot of people just didn't care to partake in it?
Results 1 to 20 of 83
Well I thought it would be a good idea to print up a bunch of signs that say "No racists Allowed" on regular paper and go door to door to stores and restaurants and ask it they would be willing to put up one of the signs in their window. I think it would help to put pressure on society by confronting people with the day to day reality of the existence of racism, or just by making people stop and think for a second about it. Racism needs to be confronted in a more active and direct way in society and people's lives, and the fact that it is wrong needs to be reinforced. Everywhere. People shouldn't be allowed to get away with even little racist jokes, they should be openly shunned by society even to the point that store owners wouldn't serve them. Hence the idea for the sign.
Thats a great idea. Did you have much luck with it or did you find that alot of people just didn't care to partake in it?
pretty good idea, tho I'm not a big supporter about not making little racist jokes, a lot of my friends that have a foreign origin can even laugh with those kind of jokes, they are jokes, don't take them serious...
"Anarchism is not a romantic fable but the hardheaded realization, based on five thousand years of experience, that we cannot entrust the management of our lives to kings, priests, politicians, generals, and county commissioners."
You need two to shake hands, but only one to make a fist...
it is a great idea, and depending on where one lives it could work, if you live in Brooklyn for example it could definitely work, if you live in the south there is almost no chance.
International Workers Association | Industrial Workers of the World | Worker's Liberty | CNT | CNT-F
"Why the hell is there a nazi flag on your icon.... unless..... no couldent be..... you couldent be one of those computer facists who have no life could you?"
-RedStaredRevolution
There was a decent antifa poster that ecouraged postal workers to refuse to distribute racist material. Worked quite well I think, people actually went on strike.
I'd suggest modelling your signs on these. And good luck with it.
however it is a bit out of date. (enrager.net is now Libcom.org)
"How you cling to your purity, young man! How afraid you are to soil your hands! All right, stay pure! What good will it do? Why did you join us? Purity is an idea for a yogi or a monk. You intellectuals and Bourgeois anarchists use it as a pretext for doing nothing. To do nothing, to remain motionless, arms at your sides, wearing kids gloves. Well, I have dirty hands. Right up to the elbows. I've plunged them in the filth and blood. But what do you hope? Do you think you'll govern innocently?"-Jean-Paul Sartre
If you don't get enough mass support and lots of people to do it then it can back fire on you by making it easy for them to identify houses.
Neo-Maoist rants: http://marcelthemaoist.blogspot.com The Commie Geek: http://mistax1337.blogspot.com
Even though Racism is wrong, it's sort of hypocritical to put up signs everywhere " No Racists Allowed." Why don't we give them their own water fountains and schools then? I am completely Anti-Fascist, but banning them from normal places is hypocritical.
Are you comparing the persecution of fascists to the persecution of black people?
That's obscene.
The point of the entire thing has obviously passed right over your fucking head.
No, that's the persecution that Racists did to black people. Martin Luther King Jr. worked to stop it his entire life, and was killed for it. So to commit the same segregation would be hypocritical, because we Anti-Racists worked so hard to stop it. I'm not talking about Fascists, I'm talking about Racists. Jim Crow Laws.
its a great idea. Someone should make a sign that we can all use and print out to make it seem more legit. Like something from ARA
"Love Other Human Beings like you would Yourself"
-- Ho Chi Minh
"We Don't Care who gets elected, because whoever it is will be Overthrown"
-- Subcomandante Marcos
You speak of Racists like if they were some race or culture themselves. Racism is a thought which is developed for some reason in a persons mind set and is not something leftists condone. Comparing racists(who choose to believe whatever their race is more superior or bunk then the other) to people of African, Mexican, Asian, or whatever other descent there is, is ridiculous as race is not an ideology or a way of thinking, it’s a genetic trait. It makes no sense to bring up Martin Luther King Jr. into your logic because he believed in uniting with all races and stopping segregation within a discriminatory way. In your logic, we should be conversing with fascists, racists, and any other type people who see race as a superiority, as if there is no problem, which there is. We are not just speaking of banning White supremacists, or Mexican nationalists, the sign would have said no racists allowed, the entire group of these reactionary people which is not discriminatory in any sense besides “discrimination against Fascists, or Racists.”. I don't know who you are, but I seriously think you should reconsider your views on things if you actually believe the bullshit your posting on here.
On a lighter note, I think the sign is a great idea and wouldn't mind photo shopping some signs myself once I can get a hold of Photoshop and Illustrator for my comp. I took these classes for the programs, but my teacher didn't have them for windows so I couldn't burn them.
lol, are you joking?
I get the feeling that MLK and his generation of anti-racists would have struggled to help racists "see the light," so to speak, instead of putting up the signs.
If we try to "out-censor" the capitalists, we will lose and what's worse we'll come across as petty and authoritarian. In an environment where 90% of the population already associates communism with the catastrophe of the Soviet Union, nothing could be tactically stupider.
If we're going to trust the proletariat, we need to stop treating it like it needs to be protected from "bad" ideas. The bourgeoisie censors because it knows that, given all the options, the working class isn't going to chose exploitation.
But our ideas don't need that kind of institutional packaging; we aren't trying to fool people or socialize them to apathy, we're trying to liberate them.
So getting all the ideas out there, even the "bad" ones, is in our interest.
We want a full and open discussion, we want a fully informed working class. 'Cause that's the only way that we win. A radicallized class-conscious proletariat can only develop in an environment of knowledge.
Trying to "no platform" our "enemies" only hurts our cause in the end because it helps keeps the working class ignorant and servile by perpetuating the notion that it must be "protected from itself".
There's nothing wrong with class-based economic actions like striking or work stopping. But there's a vast difference between leveraging economic power for better conditions and using positional authority to pursue a personal agenda.
And in the end, the capitalists are simply better at this and if we get into a war of suppression with them, they will win.
Our strength is that we are espousing a theory of emancipation against oppression. We need to capitalize on that strength and not be afraid of debate, any debate.
So you support pharmacists who refuse to dispense the morning-after pill? Or justices of the peace who won't officiate at gay weddings? Or cashiers who refuse to serve Jews?
This notion that we are all responsible only to ourselves is libertarian bullshit and it has absolutely no relation to the real world.
People have the right to chart their own lives in a general sense, but if you're performing a service to the community, you are obligated to do so impartially. If you're a doctor, you can't treat only some of the people some of the time. If you did, you'd probably go to jail.
People don't exist in a vacuum; they are a part of a society and they have duties to that society. Because when someone becomes a doctor or a phamacist or a cashier or a letter carrier, it means that someone else doesn't.
Freedom isn't about statutes and grand ideas, it's about real people on the ground. It's about writters and editors and printers and engineers. It's about holding the value of that freedom above any personal beliefs, no matter how strongly felt.
And when there's flexibility, great. When you can trade shifts or swap bags and can avoid the stuff that really bothers you, that's fantastic. But when you can't. you can't. You still don't get to fuck with other people's lives or, worse, call in the government to repress the stuff that pisses you off.
Something which is a terrible idea.
Dress it up in all the class language you can find, it's still paternalistic politics and the infantalizing of the working class.
We either trust them to emancipate themselves and set up a postcapitalist society or we think they're too stupid to read some whackjob's pamphlet without swallowing it whole.
Have you heard the "arguments" for racism? Have most people on this board?
It's not the arguments that are keeping racism alive, it's a culture of ignorance. Most racists don't even know why they hate black people, just like most homophobes don't really know why they hate gay ones.
Exposing them to the racist or homophobic litterature won't make them "more" hateful and it certainly won't turn progressive thinkers into homophobes and racists.
Besides, where do you draw the line on this one? Lots of things have the potential to "increase the effect" of "reaction". The mail's actually one of the lesser influences.
So should we start censoring the internet as well? How about telephone conversations? Should operators shut down any call that seems to be heading in a "reactionary" direction?
You are proposing that letter carriers -- and presumably other types of communications workers too -- should start actively suppressing "reactionary" materials. Well, as I see it, the only way that they can determine whether the letter they carry is "reactionary" or not is by reading it. I guess if you trust your mailman enough to censor your mail, you trust him enough to puruse it too.
For my part, though, I don't.
I don't know what his views or his interests are and I'll be damned if I'm going to give up my right to privacy out of a hope that he and others like him are correct in their analysis of what constitutes "reaction".
I cherish my right to read "filth" if I chose and I will not give it up to you or anyone else without a fight.
Because like it or not, the unavoidable historical lesson is that even if your aim is to only suppress the "bad", you inevitably end up suppressing far far more than that.
And I don't want another NKVD ...or Mutaween.
I'd love to change the world, but I don't know what to do, so I leave it up to you...
great idea comrade !!
And we've seen in the past how store owners have abused their ability to reserve the right to deny service to people. It's one thing to actively confront racism (and I admire that aspect of this project) but actually attempting to get people to prevent certain types of people from entering their stores/businesses,etc. is not only impractical but also somewhat misguided.
Where do you live?
In Sweden, it could work.
In the US, it will probably just provoke people...
It could work, anywhere but the US. At least the area I live in.
It's not the racists we fight, its the racism.
Fuck school, the boredom, the giant box we live in today. I can't do shit for a summer cuz of that.
Note: This signature advocates the burning of the box we live in today.
Note Numero Dos: I have no gaurantees as to the quality or quantity of my posts until at least September 2007.
